Niko, don't underestimate Gen Four's ability, with suitable prompts to produce realistic "I was there at the scene-here's my personal and emotional reporting" type content (whew, let me catch my breath from such a long sentence!). The looming crisis is one of epidemic uncertainty and deep fakery..
In fact Gen Four could have produced my remarks here, including exclamation marks, humorous asides and warnings about itself.
Certainly, I agree that LLMs can fake a perspective, and write things that are quite funny.
My core argument, though, is that they'd still be faking. They still did not actually "witness" the veritable explosion on the oil rig, and so they can still be called out for their BS.
Another thing I didn't mention is that it's arbitrarily simple to "fool" current AI text-generation algorithms. Adding a few quotes to a story throws them off entirely. We'll have to figure this out and, even if we do, I'm sure that AI writers will fool many people anyway.
At the start of your article, you talk about how journalists can withhold information or provide information in order to maximise the emotional effect on the reader. Do you think it would be possible for AI to achieve this purely through a knowledge and application of neurology / psychology? For example, we know about certain things which often increase levels of dopamine - could AI use this knowledge to move readers emotionally?
Hmmm, thanks for reading and good question. I'm not sure what AI will achieve in 2, 3, or 5 years' time. I suspect we'll all be surprised at its capabilities, as we were with GPT-3 and then GPT-4. Its writing and creativeness will surely improve with time, and writers should probably keep tabs on how it evolves and adapt accordingly.
With so much gloom and panic talk surrounding the future of creative work, this was a very refreshing and illuminating piece. I look forward to reading more of your work!
Niko, don't underestimate Gen Four's ability, with suitable prompts to produce realistic "I was there at the scene-here's my personal and emotional reporting" type content (whew, let me catch my breath from such a long sentence!). The looming crisis is one of epidemic uncertainty and deep fakery..
In fact Gen Four could have produced my remarks here, including exclamation marks, humorous asides and warnings about itself.
But it didn't I assure you.
See what I mean?
Certainly, I agree that LLMs can fake a perspective, and write things that are quite funny.
My core argument, though, is that they'd still be faking. They still did not actually "witness" the veritable explosion on the oil rig, and so they can still be called out for their BS.
Another thing I didn't mention is that it's arbitrarily simple to "fool" current AI text-generation algorithms. Adding a few quotes to a story throws them off entirely. We'll have to figure this out and, even if we do, I'm sure that AI writers will fool many people anyway.
At the start of your article, you talk about how journalists can withhold information or provide information in order to maximise the emotional effect on the reader. Do you think it would be possible for AI to achieve this purely through a knowledge and application of neurology / psychology? For example, we know about certain things which often increase levels of dopamine - could AI use this knowledge to move readers emotionally?
Thank you for a very interesting article :)
Hmmm, thanks for reading and good question. I'm not sure what AI will achieve in 2, 3, or 5 years' time. I suspect we'll all be surprised at its capabilities, as we were with GPT-3 and then GPT-4. Its writing and creativeness will surely improve with time, and writers should probably keep tabs on how it evolves and adapt accordingly.
I couldn’t agree more: I think AI will help writing get de-commodified. And let writers have more creative fun with it!
With so much gloom and panic talk surrounding the future of creative work, this was a very refreshing and illuminating piece. I look forward to reading more of your work!